Judges 14:4

[mattrose]

Samson was a pretty terrible character... and yet the spirit of the Lord was often empowering him.

One of the key verses in his story is Judges 14:4. Samson wants to marry a Philistine woman, but his parents initially resist. Then the narrator says,

His parents did not know that this was from the Lord, who was seeking an occasion to confront the Philistines; for at that time they were ruling over Israel.

I think this is a good place to talk about how believers in determinism and non-determinism differ. I'd imagine that many would see this verse as evidence that God is behind the scenes manipulating events to bring about his purposes. They would say God placed a desire for this woman in Samson's heart because he knew the marriage would lead to conflict and, frankly, He wanted to provoke conflict in that situation.

I'd tend to think of it differently. Samson was responsible for his own desire here. He fell for a Philistine woman and insisted upon marrying her. But rather than giving up on Samson and Israel, God sees the path they are choosing and finds a way to continue working. If Samson insists on this sinful course, God will work through the natural (negative) consequences of it to bring about the conflict (b/w Israel and the Philistines) that was wrongfully missing.

Of course, neither view can be proven to be correct, I suppose. But I think it is a very interesting text to provoke the discussion.

[TK]

It's the wording of the passage that makes it difficult. It READS as if God was behind it all from the beginning for His purposes.

If the alternative view is actually the correct view, I suppose it could be argued that from the writer's perspective that it SEEMED like God was behind it all from the beginning (even if actually He was not), which is why it is written as it is written.

But that opens up another can of worms.

TK

[steve]

I see this as the same kind of thing as God using Joseph's brothers' hostility to Joseph as the means of getting Joseph out of Canaan and into Egypt. God did not have to inspire hostility in their hearts toward Joseph. That was already present for many years previously. All God had to do was deliver Joseph into their hands at the opportune time, and the rest would naturally take its course. In the end, when Joseph looked back over the sin his brothers had committed against him, he could say "God meant it for good." Meant what? His brothers' hostility? No, his being sold into Egypt by them, which was the result of their hostility. Their hatred was a sin for which God takes no responsibility.

The betrayal of Jesus by Judas, Caiaphas and Pilate were similarly a part of God's plan, but it required no special intervention on God's part to set in motion. All it required was that God remove His protection from Jesus and allow His enemies to fulfill their own agendas. This removal of protection did not cause Christ's enemies to sin in any manner that was not already in their hearts. It simply allowed them to carry out the plans they had been contriving for many years (Mark 3:6). All that God is said to have done was to "deliver" Jesus to His enemies (Acts 2:23). This only means that He did not miraculously intervene (as He had so many times before) to save Jesus from them.

Likewise, Samson's lusts were not motivations inspired by God. Samson didn't need any help from God in that area. But, in order to create a tension between Samson and the Philistines, God did allow that, upon Samson's visit to Timnah, a particular woman whom he fancied would cross his path and catch his eye. The result required no further intervention from God. God could have prevented Samson from meeting this particular girl, but did not choose to do that, because He had use for the arrangement.

Examples like these often encourage Calvinists to claim that God ordains all things, including sin. The same passages bother Arminians, who recognize that God intervenes in some special cases to bring about certain purposes, but who think it inappropriate that God would cause someone to sin.

In answer to the Calvinists, it could be pointed out that, even if God did ordain and originate the specific sins in these passages, it would not make their case, since all of these are, admittedly, special cases of particular significance. The Arminian can recognize that God's intervention in special cases does not rightly extrapolate to His micromanagement of every inconsequential decision that people make.

In response to the Arminian's discomfort, I would suggest that the teaching of Jesus informs us that the sin does not begin in the sinful action, but in the sinful intentions of the heart. Thus adultery, though a physical sin, is already committed in the heart before the action has occurred. Likewise with murder.

In the cases of Joseph's brothers, Christ's betrayers and Samson, I believe that the actions committed by those who sinned were already committed in their hearts, or, more properly, were the outworking in action of intentions already surrendered to by the will. God did not create the sins in the hearts. Nor did He create the sins acted out. In every case, God simply allowed sinners to give free vent to their own agendas and desires, rather than intervening to prevent them. When He prevents sinners from acting out their evil desires (Ps.21:11), He has a purpose for imposing such restraint (e.g., John 7:30). Likewise, when God declines His option of restraining sinners, and allows them to act, He has His reasons for this as well. Judges 14:4 informs us of His reasons in such a case.

[mattrose]

Thanks TK and Steve for your comments!

Yes, I think the wording does lend itself to calvinistic interpretation (as TK pointed out). But I think such an interpretation is a mistake b/c it has in mind God's general sovereignty and not his meticulous sovereignty. In other words, "THIS" came "FROM" God in the sense that He allowed it (as Steve suggested) rather than in the sense that He caused it.

What Samson's parents thought may be a set of irredeemable circumstances was actually a set of circumstances which God, in fact, could redeem. They didn't realize God's great capacity to do His work in the midst of a broken situation.

[backwoodsman]

Another factor, I think, is that even after marrying Delilah, Samson could've made better choices. The eventual outcome was the result of a long series of unwise and/or wrong choices, any or all of which he could've chosen to do differently. God will accomplish His purposes no matter what we make Him work with, but it's always better for everyone involved if we make the better choices.